Amazon Wants Patent for All-You-Can-Eat Shipping 76
theodp writes "USPTO documents released Thursday show that Amazon is seeking a patent covering subscription-based shipping, aka Amazon Prime. Among the seven listed inventors is Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, who has been singing the praises of Amazon Prime to Wall Street."
I don't understand... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:I don't understand... (Score:2)
Re:I don't understand... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I don't understand... (Score:1)
Re:I don't understand... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:I don't understand... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I don't understand... (Score:2)
"Good judgment comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgment."
-- W. Wriston, former Citibank CEO
From what I know, there is something like a 60% annual turnover rate in the USPO. The only exception is the "other" office that patents porn and dildos.
Patents started as a good theory turned into yet another form of payola and big business prac
Re:I don't understand... (Score:1)
Re:I don't understand... (Score:2)
Re:I don't understand... (Score:2)
But with the current incompetancy of the USPTO, it's a safe bet!
Re:I don't understand... (Score:2)
They can't just say that's what they are doing, though, or the patent wouldn't be granted.
It's a sad, sad system.
Re:I don't understand... (Score:2)
I thought patents were supposed to be for actual inventions. You know, those innovative ideas that change the way we live out our daily lives? Since when does a subscription service count as an innovative idea. Why doesn't amazon just apply for a patent for "a web-based ecommerce sevice where people click on shit, buy it with a credit card, and have it shipped to their house???" This is asinine.
Re:I don't understand... (Score:2)
Insert "Ministry of Silly Walks" reference here.
Re:I don't understand... (Score:3, Funny)
I wouldn't be surprised at any new patents that come out these days. Let's all just hope for a complete overha
Re:I don't understand... (Score:2)
Re:I don't understand... (Score:4, Interesting)
What we need is something like a short-term copyright/patent where a "minor innovation" is protected for a short period of time so that its creators can get some benefit from being the first to do it. 6-12 months would be sufficient for Amazon to establish this program as being "theirs" and make it obvious that anyone else who does it later is an imitator.
I like this idea (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I like this idea (Score:1)
But what is the point to these mini-patents? Someone comes up with an idea that is simply an increment to existing ideas, so they get a 3-year exclusivity window?
The problem with the 'mini-patents' idea is that it opens the floodgates to abuse. The overseers of such a program (e.g. USPTO) would not put too much effort into evaluating the validity of a 'mini-patent' as the worst case is they block innovation for
Re:I like this idea (Score:1)
"A system and apparatus for automating 'mini-patent' reviews."
"A system and apparatus for awarding 'mini-patent'."
"A system and apparatus for resolving disputes of 'mini-patents'."
Then we can license it back to the USPTO who will have to pay a fee for every mini-patent they review!
No more ads on slashdot!
Re:I like this idea (Score:2)
Having different "types" of patents is problematic in any case. For example, the same patent might cover algorithms in software used in pharmaceutical manufacturing. Would that be considered a "software patent" or a "drug patent"? What happens when the patent office (inevitably) miscategorizes a patent?
How about this: Make the patents themselves always last the same amount of time. In fact, get rid of the whole notion of patents "expiring". Instead, put different time limits on enforcement of the pat
Re:I don't understand... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I don't understand... (Score:1)
Re:I don't understand... (Score:3, Interesting)
In a capitalist society we call this window of protection "first to market".
Seriously, there's not need to create ANOTHER class of patents when the current system is in such obvious shambles. Such a "short-term" patent would also likely be abused heavily, with the patent owner adding small tweaks just before the expiration term to magi
Re:I don't understand... (Score:2)
It is time for US citizens to take action and stop the USPTO madness.
Re:I don't understand... (Score:2)
Nice idea in theory, but I think the trouble would be that such protections always seem to grow longer and more powerful over time. Just look at copyri
Re:I don't understand... (Score:2)
It's actually not new either, and even if it were an invention, shouldn't be protected by patent law. International Male [internationalmale.com] has been doing this for years with their "Advantage Club". By paying an anual membership fee, you get free shipping on all of your orders.
This one is eve
Re:I don't understand... (Score:2)
We already have that. It's called the first mover advantage, and it has the huge benefit that it requires no administration or legal involvement at all.
"6-12 months would be sufficient"
The trouble, you see, is that nothing is ever sufficient. Granting protection from competition means the protected party simply becomes that much less efficient. Essentially, the theoretical reward simply gets eaten in increased costs instead; take a look at the st
if you want to catch up you should start running (Score:1)
Re:if you want to catch up you should start runnin (Score:1)
Re:if you want to catch up you should start runnin (Score:2)
Re:if you want to catch up you should start runnin (Score:2)
Re:if you want to catch up you should start runnin (Score:2)
Re:if you want to catch up you should start runnin (Score:2)
All-You-Can-Eat Shipping? (Score:5, Funny)
-----------
Lionel Hutz: Now, Mrs. Simpson, tell the court in your own words what happened after you and your husband were ejected out of the restaurant.
Marge: Well, we pretty much went straight home.
Lionel Hutz: Mrs. Simpson, remember that you are under oath.
Marge: We drove around until three in the morning looking for another open all-you-can-eat seafood restaurant.
Lionel Hutz: And when you couldn't find one?
Marge: [crying] We... went... fishing.
Lionel Hutz: Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, do these sound like the actions of a man whose had ALL he could eat?
For pity's sake. (Score:5, Funny)
"OK, Amazon, I get it! You like patents. You like them a lot. Everywhere I turn in my crappy office, it's "Amazon!" "Amazon!" "AMAZON!" Well screw it, you can just have all the goddamn patents! Yes, all of them,! They're all yours! Just LEAVE ME ALOOOOONE!!!"
Said clerk followed up by darting into a shadowy corner of the file room, and crying for several hours.
Re:For pity's sake. (Score:2)
Re:For pity's sake. (Score:2)
Cool! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Cool! (Score:2)
Re:Cool! (Score:1)
Re:Cool! (Score:2)
There's plenty of prior art for an 'up front fee' (membership) that gets you a discount on further purchases. Costcos, BJ's Warehouse and Sams club folow this model.
Yes, it's not SHIPPING, but that's Semantics. It's a customer fee to lower an undertermined number of recurring future fees. Even if you believe a BUSINESS PROCESS is a valid patent (and that is debatable), this example does not pass the non-obvious inventio
Prime will kill them eventually. (Score:5, Interesting)
Why? Because once upon a time, you could get free shipping and have something a few days later. Then, Super Saver started taking longer... and longer... and longer. They'd wait a week to ship an item that was 'ships within 24 hours'. I suppose this probably happened around the time that Prime was taking shape. But then, and this is the kicker, lots of items on the Amazon site started showing up as longer ship times than they'd had before. 'Ships within 3-5 days' or something like that for an item that used to be 24 hours. As someone who has a Prime membership, free or not, I found that irritating. But then the worst part:
They still often ship the items the next day. They just ship them by a method that will take longer to get there, even though you've used Prime for 'free second day shipping'. The excuse for this is that it 'still arrives within the delivery window', even though they're the ones who set the delivery window as being a week later for an in-stock product.
I'd rather they patented this, to be honest, because I don't want any other company copying it. I don't want to pay for the people who buy 'all you can ship' packages and then ship a huge piece of furniture on it, when all I'm usually shipping is small items. But I think that, patent or not, this will eventually either start costing a lot more or vanish entirely. The delays are a symptom of a system that doesn't work. They're having to cut corners now to afford Prime. They can't do that forever, because people won't pay for prime if *everything* starts taking a week to arrive with 'second day' shipping.
I don't want other companies doing this. I'm fine with paying for shipping if it's a reasonable price. Free is cool, too, because I know I'm still paying for it but it's packaged into the prices I'm paying, I don't have to add things to my cart to figure it out. I don't want to show up at other online sites where I shop to find that I suddenly have to shell out $80 to get things promptly because the 'free' shipping suddenly takes three times longer than it used to. It's not fair to the customers.
Re:Prime will kill them eventually. (Score:2)
I DO want other companies doing this. I want as many as possible to try their hand at their own version. Because, as in any other element of commerce, the competition will force them all to provide the best service they can to their customers at the best value, and whoever provides it the consumers will win better service as a result. I don't feel Amazon has any right to be the *only* one doing anything other than writing their own logo on their packages, and hopin
Re:Prime will kill them eventually. (Score:2)
Not normal prime (Score:2)
Now while you may not be paying for it, many are. And while you may be shipping furniture, I'm mostly shipping small packages here and there.
As long as the majority of people are going with normal buying habits Prime works in Amazon's favor, and can more than pay for the outliers or people who ship chairs or other large items. What it does help Amazon capture is semi-impulse buys where you know you want something in the next da
Re:Not normal prime (Score:2)
Amazon's only able to hype this up now because it's a novelty. It's not likely to work in the long run
Shipping costs come from excess (Score:2)
But again you are only hypothisising based on how you use it.
It could be that many people are adding a few more items to an order - I know I do.
And yes, shipping costs have to come from somewhere - which is either people who pay $80 and then never quite use it all, o
Re:Prime will kill them eventually. (Score:1)
There are only two complaints I have about Prime: one is that if you have an order of 2+ items, you can't have one show up overnight for their standard 3.99 fee and the other ship two day, you have to place the order seperately.
The other complaint is that a lot of Amazon items that are more expensive to ship are no longer available on Amazon Prime. For example, I want to buy th
Re:Prime will kill them eventually. (Score:2)
How will they word it? As exclusively as possible, obviously. They don't want anyone else to muscle in on this and likely already have lawyers salivating over a few sites that come close enough to infringing to be used as test cases. They are not filing this patent for the good of humanity, they are trying to get a compet
Re:Prime will kill them eventually. (Score:1)
It probably depends on individual order history, but I've gotten such shipping fees waved as a Prime member, and I've even gotten th
Re:Prime will kill them eventually. (Score:1)
I'm sure escalating fuel prices have a hand in the corner-cutting you've seen and written about. I've noticed a lot of other online vendors no longer offer the free shipping options, and the regular shipping has crept upwards over the last year or so.
Given Amazon's recent stock price woes, It's quote possible that your subject line is correct... Prime wi
It actually changed my buying habits (Score:5, Insightful)
Now that I have it, I don't even bother to try and combine orders. I just order when I want. Last week, I bought 2 ink cartridges for my ink jet for about $6 each. I ordered one in the morning and the other in the evening.
What Prime does though (and obviously the reason Amazon offers the service) is that when I want to order anything online, I always check Amazon first and in 95% of the cases, I order it from them.
Re:It actually changed my buying habits (Score:5, Insightful)
I do the same thing, and usually weigh the increased amazon cost against the pay-for-shipping, but cheaper unit-price vendor. It works, imo, because nobody else does it. If everybody had the option - say a Buy.com Prime membership - it would lose its value. I'm not going to pay three or four vendors $70/yr - it's only be aggragating a large percentage of my purchases in one place that makes it worthwhile. (I'm not sure there's a resonable logic in there, to be quite honest). Also, $3.99 for an overnight shipment of a reference book I really need or a gift I've forgotten to buy/send is a bargain compared to the usual shipping rates.
Re:It actually changed my buying habits (Score:1)
The greatest thing about it is that I can share it. Sure, I order from amazon a lot. But I share it with my father, my girlfriend and my boss. My boss has an amazon CC, always has the A9 discount and with my amazon prime he orders almost everything from amazon, down to condoms.
Low self-esteem or something. Very sad. (Score:2)
so its a cash-flow scam, so what? (Score:2)
its really no different from any other "discount membership club" except the product you save on.
worthy of
Re:so its a cash-flow scam, so what? (Score:2)
Re:so its a cash-flow scam, so what? (Score:2)
Bingo! I posted exactly this sentiment in a post just moments ago. Amazon's threshhold for patentability is, 'has this scenario' been patented. A scenario is a situation, not an invention.
Now, I bet you $2 either:
* you get marked down redundant (even though you were first -- moderators don't REALLY check timestamps), OR
* A testy moderator marks this post 'flamebait', for no reason other than noting the above
Re:so its a cash-flow scam, so what? (Score:2)
they're just playing by the rules the PTO has already established and publically stated (even back in the 90s when
anything more and they defer to the courts to handle it. wh
Re:so its a cash-flow scam, so what? (Score:1)
fee) since 2004.
Mmm...peanuts (Score:1)
I actually know someone who got a candy shipment as a gift, opened the box, and tried to eat those styrofoam packing peanuts.
All-You-Can-Eat Shipping? (Score:3, Funny)
-dZ.
This is hardly novel... (Score:2)
This is stupid and Prime usually sucks (Score:2)
That aside, Amazon Prime is ok except for one giant flaw, you can't search for items that are available via Prime. So if I want to grab, say an extension cable or something, I've got to wade through pages trying to find a seller that is eligable for Prime shipping.
Isn't this just "members get shipping free"? (Score:1)
If this continues, the cooperation required for international IP treaties to work will collaspe. What must other countries think of the US?